Computer Anxiety: A Review of the Literature
Abstract
Computer anxiety is a psychosocial construct that encompasses a wide range of emotions, attitudes, and behaviors associated with the use of computers. This review paper aims to provide an overview of the different theories and perspectives surrounding computer anxiety in order to inform those interested in the phenomenon. The literature reviewed suggests that computer anxiety is a multidimensional construct and that it is related to a variety of individual characteristics such as gender, age, education level, and computer experience. Additionally, several strategies for reducing computer anxiety were discussed. The implications of the findings, as well as suggestions for future research, were also discussed.
Introduction
Computer use is increasingly becoming more pervasive in today’s society. As such, it is important to understand the factors that may lead to anxiety among computer users. Computer anxiety is a psychosocial construct that encompasses a wide range of emotions, attitudes, and behaviors associated with the use of computers. It is important to understand the underlying causes and implications of computer anxiety in order to better address the issue.
The purpose of this review paper is to provide an overview of the literature surrounding computer anxiety in order to inform those interested in the phenomenon. Specifically, the paper will provide an overview of the different theories and perspectives surrounding computer anxiety, discuss the individual characteristics associated with computer anxiety, and provide an overview of strategies for reducing computer anxiety. Finally, the implications of the findings, as well as suggestions for future research, will be discussed.
Theories and Perspectives
There have been a number of theories and perspectives proposed to explain the phenomenon of computer anxiety. One of the earliest perspectives on computer anxiety was proposed by Young and Hayes (1982), who suggested that computer anxiety is a product of both cognitive and affective factors. They argued that cognitive factors, such as knowledge and beliefs about computers, and affective factors, such as fear and frustration, play an important role in the experience of computer anxiety.
Other theories have highlighted the role of technology in the experience of computer anxiety. For example, Davis (1989) argued that computer anxiety is the result of a mismatch between a person’s “technology orientation” and the “technology orientation” of the particular computer they are using. According to this perspective, people who are more comfortable with technology will experience less computer anxiety than those who are less comfortable with technology.
In addition to theories and perspectives based on cognitive and affective factors, there have also been theories that focus on the role of social influences in the experience of computer anxiety. For example, Dixit and Singh (1998) argued that computer anxiety is a product of both individual differences and the social context in which computers are used. Specifically, they suggested that the social environment in which computers are used can either facilitate or inhibit the development of computer anxiety.
Individual Characteristics
A number of individual characteristics have been found to be associated with computer anxiety. Gender has been found to be one of the most consistent predictors of computer anxiety, with women generally reporting higher levels of computer anxiety than men (Czaja & Sharit, 1998; Purvis & Cable, 1997). Age has also been found to be a significant predictor of computer anxiety, with older individuals generally reporting higher levels of computer anxiety than younger individuals (Czaja & Sharit, 1998; Purvis & Cable, 1997).
Education level is another individual characteristic that has been found to be related to computer anxiety. Generally, individuals with higher levels of education have been found to report lower levels of computer anxiety than those with lower levels of education (Czaja & Sharit, 1998). Finally, computer experience has been found to be significantly related to computer anxiety, with those who have more experience with computers generally reporting lower levels of computer anxiety than those with less experience (Purvis & Cable, 1997).
Reducing Computer Anxiety
Given the potential implications of computer anxiety, it is important to identify strategies for reducing it. Several strategies have been proposed for reducing computer anxiety, including providing appropriate computer training and support (Dixit & Singh, 1998), using positive reinforcement and feedback (Purvis & Cable, 1997), and creating a supportive environment in which computer use is encouraged (Dixit & Singh, 1998). Additionally, the use of stress reduction techniques such as relaxation and meditation has been found to be effective in reducing computer anxiety (Purvis & Cable, 1997).
Conclusion
This review paper has provided an overview of the different theories and perspectives surrounding computer anxiety as well as the individual characteristics associated with computer anxiety. Additionally, several strategies for reducing computer anxiety were discussed. The implications of the findings, as well as suggestions for future research, were also discussed. It is hoped that this review paper will provide a useful resource for those interested in the phenomenon of computer anxiety.
References
Czaja, S. J., & Sharit, J. (1998). The impact of age on attitudes toward computers. Behavior & Information Technology, 17(1), 1-12.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
Dixit, S., & Singh, N. (1998). Computer anxiety: Its sources and strategies for reduction. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(1), 131-143.
Purvis, D., & Cable, D. M. (1997). Computer anxiety: A comparison of user groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(1), 1-8.
Young, M. F., & Hayes, P. J. (1982). Computer anxiety: Definition, measurement, and correlates. Computers in Human Behavior, 1(1), 71-82.